Darren C. Goodrich – and the firm that employs him or her – is regulated by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).
If you are like most people, before you go out to dinner at a new restaurant, you probably take a quick look at the reviews. This makes sense; you are going to pay for an expensive dinner, and you need to be sure that you are getting a good value.
Yet, when choosing a financial advisor, many people fail to conduct this same level of due diligence. Before turning over access to your money, you need to be sure that you have found a financial advisor that you can trust. Here, our audit report, including details of allegations, complaints, and sanctions will help you decide whether or not to invest with Darren C. Goodrich.
The stock market is a device for transferring money from the impatient to the patient… Warren Buffet
BrokerComplaints.com is currently investigating allegations related to Darren C. Goodrich. We provide a free platform for investors to help them in their claims against negligent brokers and brokerage firms.
About Darren Goodrich
Darren C. Goodrich is an Investment Adviser. Darren C. Goodrich’s Central Registration Depository (CRD) number is 4213469 and the FINRA Profile can be found at – https://brokercheck.finra.org/individual/summary/4213469.
Click here to download a Detailed Audit Report for Darren C. Goodrich.
Darren C. Goodrich has previously been reprimanded and has disclosures and/or client dispute(s) listed at FINRA BrokerCheck.
Accusations and Disclosures
You can find below, a quick snapshot of Darren C. Goodrich’s regulatory actions, arbitrations, and complaints.
DISCLOSURE 1 –
- Event Date: 2/8/2017
- Disclosure Type: Regulatory
- Disclosure Resolution: Final
- Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA:
- Initiated By: UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
- Allegations: SEC Admin Release 34-79990/February 8, 2017: The Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) against Darren Goodrich. On June 27, 2016, Goodrich pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud in violation of 18 United States Code, Section 371, before a Magistrate Judge in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, in United States v. A.J. Discala, et al., 14 Cr. 399. On August 10, 2016, Goodrich entered into a written agreement to plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud in violation of 18 United States Code, Section 371, before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, in United States v. Darren Goodrich, No.16 Civ. 630. On February 1, 2017, a final judgment was entered by consent against Goodrich, permanently enjoining him from future violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act, and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, in the civil action entitled SEC v. DelPresto, et al., No. 15 Civ. 8656 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey.
- Resolution: Order
- Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Bar (Permanent)
- Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: any broker, dealer, investment adviser, municipal securities dealer, municipal advisor, transfer agent or NRSRO
- Duration: Indefinite
- Start Date: 2/8/2017
DISCLOSURE 2 –
- Event Date: 11/28/2016
- Disclosure Type: Criminal
- Disclosure Resolution: Final Disposition
- Disclosure Detail :: Criminal Charges :: Charges: Securities Fraud
- Disposition: Pled guilty
DISCLOSURE 3 –
- Event Date: 11/17/2016
- Disclosure Type: Civil
- Disclosure Resolution: Final
- Disclosure Detail :: Initiated By: UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
- Allegations: SEC Litigation Release 23736/February 1, 2017: According to the SEC’s Second Amended Complaint, Goodrich facilitated the profitable dumping of the issuers’ stock by using his dual role as market maker and registered representative to arrange for coordinated and matched trading between and amongst accounts owned or controlled by his cohorts.
- Resolution: Judgment Rendered
- Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Disgorgement
- Sanction Details :: Amount: $687,067.75 Sanctions: Monetary Penalty other than Fines Sanctions: Injunction
- Sanctions: penny stock bar
DISCLOSURE 4 –
- Event Date: 11/4/2015
- Disclosure Type: Employment Separation After Allegations
- Disclosure Resolution:
- Disclosure Detail :: Firm Name: Monarch Bay Securities, LLC
- Termination Type: Discharged
- Allegations: Securities Fraud
DISCLOSURE 5 –
- Event Date: 11/2/2015
- Disclosure Type: Criminal
- Disclosure Resolution: Final Disposition
- Disclosure Detail :: Criminal Charges :: Charges: Securities Fraud, Wire Fraud
- Disposition: Pled guilty
DISCLOSURE 6 –
- Event Date: 11/11/2014
- Disclosure Type: Regulatory
- Disclosure Resolution: Final
- Disclosure Detail :: DocketNumberFDA: 2010023220505
- DocketNumberAAO: 2010023220505
- Initiated By: FINRA
- Allegations: WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE FINDINGS, GOODRICH CONSENTED TO THE SANCTIONS AND TO THE ENTRY OF FINDINGS THAT ON BEHALF OF CERTAIN CLIENTS, HE SOLD CERTAIN SHARES OF AN ISSUER WHOSE SECURITIES WERE NOT REGISTERED AND WERE NOT SUBJECT TO AN APPLICABLE EXEMPTION FROM REGISTRATION, IN CONTRAVENTION OF SECTION 5 OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933. THE FINDINGS STATED THAT GOODRICH’S CUSTOMERS DEPOSITED AND SOLD LARGE BLOCKS OF THE ISSUER REPEATEDLY. THE CUSTOMERS COMPLETED DEPOSITED SECURITIES QUESTIONNAIRES, IN WHICH THEY INDICATED THAT THEY ACQUIRED THE SHARES IN PRIVATE TRANSACTIONS FROM OTHER MEMBERS OF THE GROUP. THEY GAVE NO EXPLANATION OF THEIR BUSINESS ACTIVITIES AND GOODRICH’S MEMBER FIRM AND GOODRICH DID NOT ADEQUATELY INVESTIGATE THE TRANSACTIONS TO DETERMINE THE BASIS FOR THE REPEATED ISSUANCE OF LARGE BLOCKS OF STOCK. DESPITE THE PRESENCE OF RED FLAGS, THE FIRM APPROVED THE SALE, CONCLUDING THE CUSTOMERS WERE NOT ACTING IN CONCERT. THAT CONCLUSION WAS NOT REVIEWED OR REVISITED, EVEN AFTER SIX OF THE CUSTOMERS SOLD ABOUT FOUR MILLION SHARES SIX DAYS LATER, ALL IN ONE DAY. GOODRICH TOOK AND EXECUTED THE SELL ORDERS IN TWO GROUPS. THE FIRST WAS COMPLETED WITHIN A MINUTE AND A HALF AND, AN HOUR LATER, THE SECOND WAS COMPLETED WITHIN ONE MINUTE. GOODRICH FAILED TO UNDERTAKE SUFFICIENT EFFORTS TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER THE STOCK COULD BE PROPERLY SOLD, AND ACCORDINGLY DID NOT SATISFY HIS DUTY TO CONDUCT A REASONABLE INQUIRY, WHICH IS A CRUCIAL PART OF THE BROKERS’ EXEMPTION.
- Resolution: Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)
- Sanction Details :: Sanctions: Civil and Administrative Penalty(ies)/Fine(s)
- Sanction Details :: Amount: $10,000.00 Sanctions: Suspension
- Sanction Details :: Registration Capacities Affected: ANY CAPACITY
- Duration: 30 DAYS
- Start Date: 12/1/2014
- End Date: 12/30/2014
- Regulator Statement: FINE PAID IN FULL ON NOVEMBER 24, 2014.
- Broker Comment: MITIGATION STATEMENT OF DARREN C. GOODRICH RE: AWC 2010023220505. MR. GOODRICH SUBMITS THIS MITIGATION STATEMENT, IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE FACTUAL OR LEGAL FINDINGS BY FINRA, OR REFLECT THE VIEWS OF FINRA OR ITS STAFF. MR. GOODRICH’S EFFORTS TO COMPLY WITH SECTION 5 INCLUDED CAREFULLY FOLLOWING ALL OF THE FIRM’S COMPLIANCE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES RELATING TO COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 5 INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING: MR. GOODRICH CONSISTENTLY UTILIZED THE FIRM’S CLIENT QUESTIONNAIRE (THE DSQ) THAT INCLUDED QUESTIONS INTENDED TO DETERMINE TRADEABILITY OF THE SHARES AND TO IDENTIFY OTHER REGULATORY RED FLAGS. THE DSQ UNDERWENT SEVERAL ITERATIONS TO IMPROVE INFORMATION GATHERED, AND MR. GOODRICH PROVIDED SUGGESTIONS TO COMPLIANCE THAT WERE INCORPORATED INTO THE DSQ. WHEN REVISED FORMS WERE ADOPTED, HE IMMEDIATELY USED THEM. IN AUGUST 2009, THE DSQ WAS EXPANDED FROM A 1-PAGE DOCUMENT TO A 4-PAGE DOCUMENT THAT INCLUDED 21 QUESTIONS INTENDED TO DETERMINE TRADEABILITY. THE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS INCLUDED SUGGESTIONS FROM MR. GOODRICH AND ASKED, REASON FOR DEPOSITING SHARES; DATE SHARES WERE ACQUIRED; AMOUNT/MANNER OF PAYMENT; WHO SHARES WERE ACQUIRED FROM; NUMBER OF SHARES OWNED OR CONTROLLED, NUMBER OF SHARES THAT HAD BEEN SOLD BY ACCOUNT HOLDER IN THE PAST; WHETHER THE DEPOSITED SECURITIES WERE RESTRICTED; WHETHER ISSUER’S SEC FILINGS WERE CURRENT; WHETHER THE ISSUER WAS EVER A SHELL; WHETHER THE ACCOUNT HOLDER HAD EVER BEEN AN OFFICER, DIRECTOR, AFFILIATE, CONTROL PERSON OR 5% OWNER OF THE ISSUER; WHETHER THE ACCOUNT HOLDER HAD ANY RELATIONSHIP WITH ISSUER OR ITS CONTROL PERSONS; AND WHETHER THE ACCOUNT HOLDER HAD MADE ANY PAYMENTS TO ANY OTHER PERSON IN CONNECTION WITH THE SALE OF THE SHARES. MR. GOODRICH ENSURED THAT DSQS WERE COMPLETED AND SIGNED BY HIS CLIENTS. IN MAY 2010, THE DSQ WAS AGAIN REVISED AND EXPANDED FROM FOUR TO FIVE PAGES. THIS FURTHER REVISION INCLUDES 38 QUESTIONS AND WAS ADOPTED BY THE FIRM’S CLEARING FIRM. MR. GOODRICH COOPERATED WITH THE FIRM’S COMPLIANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF AND ASSISTED WITH THE FIRM’S UTILIZATION OF A \STOCK CERTIFICATE CHECKLIST\ AND \DUE DILIGENCE PACKAGE\ THAT DOCUMENTED THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION RELATIVE TO EACH TRANSACTION THAT MR. GOODRICH WAS INVOLVED IN, INCLUDING THE STOCK CERTIFICATE NUMBER, NUMBER OF SHARES, STOCK POWERS, OPINION LETTER, WHETHER THERE WAS A VISIBLE LEGEND, AND WHETHER A DSQ WAS SENT TO THE CUSTOMER. SIMILARLY, MR. GOODRICH COOPERATED WITH THE FIRM’S COMPLIANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF AND ASSISTED THEM IN CONNECTION WITH THE ASSEMBLAGE OF \DUE DILIGENCE\ PACKAGES FOR EACH TRANSACTION THAT HE WAS INVOLVED IN, WHICH INCLUDED THE DSQ, THE SECURITIES CHECKLIST, ANY NOTES/MEMOS TO FILE, ANY POWERS OF ATTORNEY, ANY EXISTING OPINION LETTERS, AND CORRESPONDENCE WITH CUSTOMER AND TRANSFER AGENT. AS PACKAGES WERE REVIEWED BY THE FIRM’S COMPLIANCE OFFICER, MR. GOODRICH ANSWERED ALL QUESTIONS THAT AROSE AND OTHERWISE COOPERATED WITH COMPLIANCE. MR. GOODRICH BELIEVED THAT HIS FIRM’S COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES WERE ADEQUATE. MR. GOODRICH LEARNED IN PHONE CONVERSATIONS WITH OTHER TRADERS THAT THEIR FIRMS DID NOT UTILIZE INCOMING STOCK QUESTIONNAIRES OR OTHER COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES ADOPTED BY THE FIRM. THUS, MR. GOODRICH REASONABLY BELIEVED THAT HIS FIRM’S COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES WERE ADEQUATE AND EXCEEDED INDUSTRY STANDARD. THE CUSTOMERS WHO SOLD STOCK OF THE ISSUER REFERENCED IN THE AWC HAD UNDER 1% OF THE TOTAL VOTING STOCK. THE RELATED DEBT CONVERSION TRANSACTION WAS PREPARED BY A PROMINENT SECURITIES ATTORNEY. ALL OF THE TRANSACTIONS IN QUESTION WERE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY HIS SUPERVISOR. MR. GOODRICH HAS NO PRIOR DISCIPLINARY HISTORY. ADDITIONALLY, MR. GOODRICH COOPERATED FULLY WITH THE STAFF IN ITS ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS WITH REGARD TO ALL AWC ISSUES. FINALLY, THE FIRM HAS INITIATED MULTIPLE ENHANCEMENTS TO ITS PROCEDURES AND SUPERVISORY SYSTEMS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 5, AND MR. GOODRICH CONTINUES TO FOLLOW AND SUPPORT ALL OF THESE ENHANCEMENTS.
According to a study prepared for the FINRA Investor Education Foundation, 80 percent of American investors report that they have been solicited to participate in a fraud scheme, while 11 percent of American investors report that they personally lost money as a result of fraud.
FINRA notes that the rate of investment fraud is most likely much higher than it is reported. This is because many victims of financial advisor scams are too ashamed to come forward. Further, the study also found that a significant number of investors do not know how to spot common red flags of investment fraud. The least you should do is share your experience with other potential victims of investment scams.
Previous Associations
Under federal securities law and securities industry regulations, registered investment firms have a legal duty to supervise their financial advisors. Section 15(b)(4)(E) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 makes a securities firm liable for the conduct of representatives.
- MONARCH BAY SECURITIES, LLC (CRD#: 141391) :: 9/17/2015 – 11/5/2015 :: IRVINE, CA
- BMA SECURITIES, LLC (CRD#: 108219) :: 10/2/2001 – 10/8/2015 :: EL SEGUNDO, CA
- J. ALEXANDER SECURITIES, INC. (CRD#: 7809) :: 3/28/2001 – 1/3/2002 :: LOS ANGELES, CA
The duty to supervise securities representatives is a strong legal requirement. Registered investment firms must take many different steps to ensure that they are protecting their customers from irresponsible and criminal financial advisors.
Legit or Not?
Unfortunately, stockbroker fraud is more common than many investors would like to think. And yes, stockbrokers (including Darren C. Goodrich, but not limited to) can (and do) steal money from their clients. While it’s rare that a broker will literally steal his client’s money (though that does happen), typically the “theft” of investment funds comes in the form of other fraudulent violations of securities law and FINRA rules which leads to significant investment losses.
Sometimes investment losses occur because advisors, stockbrokers, and even brokerage firms, commit fraud. Massimo Vignelli
Investors generally understand that there are risks associated with buying and selling securities. The market can go up, and the market can go down. No matter how skilled of an investor you are, there are always risks. With that being said, sometimes investment losses cannot be blamed on simple back luck.
There are 10 major types of complaints we receive against Investment Brokers –
- Outright Theft (Conversion of Funds)
- Unauthorized Trading
- Misrepresentation or Omission of Material Facts
- Excessive Trading (Churning)
- Lack of Diversification
- Unsuitable Investment Recommendations
- Failure to Disclose a Personal Conflict of Interest
- Front Running of Transactions
- Breakpoint Sale Violations
- Negligent Portfolio Management
Do your due diligence before investing. Public records are available for everybody to review and decide on the safest bet.
How to Protect Yourself
We, as citizens, place a great deal of trust in the financial advisors who are tasked with helping us achieve and maintain financial security. Most of the time financial advisors and stockbrokers are honest folks who work diligently in their client’s best interests. However, on occasion financial advisors and the brokerage firms who employ them mess up and cause serious financial harm to their clients. Sometimes these losses are caused by simple negligence. Other times fraud or other serious misconduct is to blame.
Here are 5 signs that your broker needs to be reported –
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, certain investment professionals, known as registered investment advisors (RIAs), owe fiduciary obligations to their customers. Your investment broker must always look out for your best interests. If you lost money because of your broker’s breach of fiduciary duty, you may be entitled to compensation for the full value of your damages.
- Unsuitable Investments: Many financial advisors are not fiduciaries. Instead, they are held to the suitability standard. These stockbrokers and financial advisors can only sell and recommend financial products that are appropriate for a customer’s unique investment profile. If you lost money in unsuitable investments, you should consider reporting them.
- Material Misrepresentations or Omissions: Brokers have a duty to make fair and honest representations to their clients. If they fail to do so, and an investor loses money due to a misrepresentation or a material omission, the broker may be liable for the investor’s losses.
- Lack of Diversification: Brokers must also act with the appropriate level of professional skill. Pushing a customer into over-concentrated investments is highly risky. Brokers can be held liable for losses sustained because of an investor’s inappropriate lack of diversification.
- Excessive Trading (Churning): Stockbrokers and financial advisors must have a well-grounded, reasonable basis to execute all trades. Unfortunately, there are cases in which brokers will frequently trade on a customer’s account, simply to increase their own fees. This unlawful practice is known as churning.
- Unauthorized Trading: Brokers must have the proper legal authority to make transactions on behalf of a client. If you lost money because your broker made trades that you never approved of, you may have been the victim of unauthorized trading. You should consult with an experienced attorney.
Report Darren Goodrich
In order to prevail in an investment fraud lawsuit or FINRA arbitration cases, you must be able to assert a viable ‘cause of action’.
Darren C. Goodrich – and the firm that employs this broker – is regulated by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). FINRA provides an online form to allow investors to file a formal complaint against their financial advisor, stockbroker, or brokerage firm.
Click here to go to FINRA’s Online Complaint Form →
This form will ask you for specific information related to your complaint. Be prepared by gathering the following:
- Name and symbol for the investment product in question.
- The CRD number (4213469) for the broker – Darren C. Goodrich
- Your complete contact information.
Remember, it is advised to report your broker to FINRA, only after you have exhausted all of your other remedies and carefully prepared a compelling complaint. Once you file a complaint against your broker at FINRA, your case will be bound by FINRA’s rules and the arbitration panel’s eventual decision. The time clock will start, and your complaint will be served on your broker or broker-dealer.